Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30733075›Full record

SynthesisEBioMedicine2019

Biomarker concordance between primary colorectal cancer and its metastases.

D S Bhullar, J Barriuso, S Mullamitha, M P Saunders, S T O'Dwyer, O Aziz

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in EBioMedicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 78 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
78citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

78 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. FROM ONCOLOGIST TO SURGEON - GENETICS IN COLORECTAL METASTASIS FOR SURGEONS.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2025
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

18 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

D S BhullarColorectal & Peritoneal Oncology Centre, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Science, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, UK.
J BarriusoColorectal & Peritoneal Oncology Centre, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Science, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, UK.
S MullamithaColorectal & Peritoneal Oncology Centre, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Science, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, UK.
M P SaundersColorectal & Peritoneal Oncology Centre, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Science, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, UK.
S T O'DwyerColorectal & Peritoneal Oncology Centre, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Science, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, UK.
O AzizColorectal & Peritoneal Oncology Centre, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Division of Cancer Sciences, School of Medical Science, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, UK. Electronic address: omer.aziz@christie.nhs.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of biomarkers to target anti-EGFR treatments for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) is well-established, requiring molecular analysis of primary or metastatic biopsies. We aim to review concordance between primary CRC and its metastatic sites.

methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis of all published studies (1991-2018) reporting on biomarker concordance between primary CRC and its metastatic site(s) was undertaken according to PRISMA guidelines using several medical databases. Studies without matched samples or using peripheral blood for biomarker analysis were excluded.

findings61 studies including 3565 patient samples were included. Median biomarker concordance for KRAS (n = 50) was 93.7% [67-100], NRAS (n = 11) was 100% [90-100], BRAF (n = 22) was 99.4% [80-100], and PIK3CA (n = 17) was 93% [42-100]. Meta-analytic pooled discordance was 8% for KRAS (95% CI = 5-10%), 8% for BRAF (95% CI = 5-10%), 7% for PIK3CA (95% CI = 2-13%), and 28% overall (95% CI = 14-44%). The liver was the most commonly biopsied metastatic site (n = 2276), followed by lung (n = 438), lymph nodes (n = 1123), and peritoneum (n = 132). Median absolute concordance in multiple biomarkers was 81% (5-95%).

interpretationMetastatic CRC demonstrates high concordance across multiple biomarkers, suggesting that molecular testing of either the primary or liver and lung metastasis is adequate. More research on colorectal peritoneal metastases is required.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMaleNeoplasm MetastasisNeoplasm StagingPrognosisPublication BiasBiomarkers, TumorBiomarkerBRAFColorectal cancerConcordancePIK3CARAS

Identifiers

PMID30733075
PMCPMC6413540

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.